Distinguished academic and UCT council member Professor Glenda Gray has lodged a formal complaint against two fellow council members for allegedly violating UCT’s code of conduct.

News24 says it was informed that shortly after a meeting on 15 March, Gray lodged a complaint against Advocates Kessler Perumalsamy and Mark Oppenheimer. Perumalsamy said the allegations were ‘completely untrue and without merit’ while Oppenheimer described them as ‘false and outrageous’.

‘She (Gray) was really shaken by the events, and that’s when she contacted the chair of council and said she was really upset,’ an insider told News24.

Gray, a former president of the SA Medical Research Council, declined to comment on the complaint. However, according to the insider, the problem started after UCT and other universities lost funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and USAID this year. 

‘Glenda said at the time that we must not create fearmongering, which did not go down well with some council members,’ said the insider.

The insider said that UCT’s financial losses were blamed on the council’s adoption of two resolutions on the conflict in Gaza in June 2024.

The first council resolution that was passed repeated a call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the passage of humanitarian aid and the return of all captives. This resolution also condemned the destruction of the education sector in Gaza and the massive scale of killing of teachers and university staff in the current war. 

The second resolution stated that no UCT academic may enter into relations, or continue relations with, any research group and/or network whose author affiliations are with the Israeli Defence Forces, and/or the broader Israeli military establishment.

The source said there was a complaint from Gray and counter-complaints.

Gray told News24 that she respects the internal process, which makes provision for an investigation ‘that allows both the complainant and those complained against a fair hearing’. ‘Everybody should respect that. Their readiness to ventilate this in public astounds me.’

Said Gray: ‘What happened to me at the council meeting was traumatic.’ 

Meanwhile, Perumalsamy said the clear implication of Gray’s allegation was verbal assault.

He said: ‘What I can say is I have a tremendous amount of respect for Glenda and the work that she does, and I won’t say anything uncharitable about her. I think the allegations are unfortunate and untrue, and they arise because the council is conflicted about governance issues. On that score, Glenda and I have parted ways in how we understand the council’s role in upholding governance.’

Perumalsamy said that in a council meeting prior to Gray’s complaint, the council had considered funding risks to the university and that there was a real risk that the university would continue to lose money because of the resolutions that it took, specifically the funding support from the US, notes News24.

‘In the course of the council’s deliberations, Glenda remarked that that was fearmongering. Those were her words. In the next council meeting (15 March) those risks had materialised. The vice-chancellor had presented his report, and it showed that it was true that the university did lose and will lose money from United States funding and NIH grants, among other things.’

Said Perumalsamy: 'I called Glenda out in council about that. I said that her advice was wrong. She had said it was fearmongering. It clearly was not. I think that embarrassed Glenda.'

He said he had a personal interaction with Gray in which he indicated what the vice-chancellor’s report conveyed, adding: ‘I think she regarded that interaction as some kind of assault. ‘I did not swear or shout at her or use impolite language. I spoke about what the vice-chancellor’s report conveyed.'

He added: ‘The complaint against me is unfortunate, and I think it’s symptomatic of a larger governance crisis in the university.’

Full News24 report